You can outfit the whole family with them for what it would cost for one Tesla almost-6-figure-commutermobile. And they'll take you as far as you'd ever want to drive.

There's no mass market appeal for the Tesla. They're neat and all. But this is their market...

Once the EV is forced to compete in the rational vs the 'status symbol' market, there's really not much of a case to be made for them.

We'll see about that. I believe that not only will the price of EVs compare to their ICE counterparts by around 2020, by around 2030 they will be considerably cheaper. There is a great case to be made for them. The technology isn't quite there yet but it will be and when that happens the ICE is toast.

LOS ANGELES — The solar panels covering a vast warehouse roof in the sun-soaked Inland Empire region east of Los Angeles were only two years into their expected 25-year life span when they began to fail.

We'll see about that. I believe that not only will the price of EVs compare to their ICE counterparts by around 2020, by around 2030 they will be considerably cheaper. There is a great case to be made for them. The technology isn't quite there yet but it will be and when that happens the ICE is toast.

And the Passat is hardly comparable to the Model S.

Nobody can predict out on the 20 year horizon. I'm not saying EVs won't be important someday. But they won't be while they're based on current Li-Ion battery technology.

And if that battery technology gets significantly upgraded, it won't be because some niche car manufacturer was pumping out a few thousand battery-powered cars per year.

There are much much larger economic players pushing for that same technology. Tesla isn't even a drop in that bucket. But in the meantime, our broke government keeps subsidizing $100,000 status symbols for the 1% while insisting it doesn't have the means to keep even basic government functions running.

LOS ANGELES — The solar panels covering a vast warehouse roof in the sun-soaked Inland Empire region east of Los Angeles were only two years into their expected 25-year life span when they began to fail.

Probably from China. I didn't click on the link but that is where some of the cheap panels are coming from to make Solar more affordable.

Probably from China. I didn't click on the link but that is where some of the cheap panels are coming from to make Solar more affordable.

It's a double edged sword when it comes to solar. They produce such little power for the cost the panels have to be super cheap for anyone to buy them. But the cheap panels don't work for even close to their stated lifespan.

NiMH isn't efficient enough to build use for serious transportation. It's cheaper but theoretical range would be much worse than what Li-Ion is capable of.

The question is, if the NiMHs were available, they'd make the cars much cheaper, and given the price of gas, a lot more attractive to the consumer. So what if they only give you a hundred miles a day? If 99% of your driving is less than 40 miles a day, it's a great deal. How many American families own two cars? Wouldn't it be an easy decision to make one of them an EV, even if it only gets a 100 miles per charge? Cut your gas and maintenance outflow in half?

What Chevron did is kill the transitional, cheaper technology that would get people into, and familiar with, EV technology. They're not stupid. They're greedy aholes, but they're not stupid.

Following Teslas bursting into flames from minor traffic accidents this thread may have been premature.

Three, all due to damage. One of the cars actually plowed through a cement wall and hit a tree then caught fire. The driver walked away with minor injuries.

In the meantime, how have internal combustion vehicles fared?

Quote:

From 2008 to 2010, an estimated 194,000 highway
vehicle fires occurred in the United States each year
resulting in an annual average of approximately 300
deaths, 1,250 injuries and $1.1 billion in property loss.

Why are conservatives so afraid of non-dino powered tech? So afraid they are willing to remain willfully ignorant and/or simply lie about things.

Obviously you have no clue of the primary drivers behind costs in an electric car. Until battery technology improves substantially, electric cars are not cost competitive.

Same thing goes for solar power generation. Renewable energy (solar, wind) is much more expensive than fossil fuels. Until that changes (which won't happen anytime soon), there is no reason to force increased costs onto the American public.

Whatever happened to "peak oil"? Lol.

This administration is EXTREMELY lucky that the fracking revolution is giving energy independence to the US, and with it a MASSIVE boost to the American economy. No thanks, to this administration, of course.

For those interested, the owner's testimonial from the latest incident:

Quote:

I am thankful to God that I was totally uninjured in any way from this impact. Had I not been in a Tesla, that object could have punched through the floor and caused me serious harm. From the time of impact of the object until the time the car caught fire was about five minutes. During this time, the car warned me that it was damaged and instructed me to pull over. I never felt as though I was in any imminent danger. While driving after I hit the object until I pulled over, the car performed perfectly, and it was a totally controlled situation. There was never a point at which I was anywhere even close to any flames.

The firemen arrived promptly and applied water to the flames. They were about to pry open the doors, so I pressed my key button and the handles presented and everything worked even though the front of the car was on fire. No flames ever reached the cabin, and nothing inside was damaged. I was even able to get my papers and pens out of the glove compartment.

This experience does not in any way make me think that the Tesla Model S is an unsafe car. I would buy another one in a heartbeat.

This whole thing is lots of hubub over nothing as far as I can tell.
The way it's being reported by the anti EV ninnies you'd think the thing erupted into a firestorm after hitting a pothole.

Three fires after the vehicle in question took major damage from either extra-ordinary road debris (large chunks of metal capable of piercing 3" holes or worse in 1/4" armor plating) or drunken idiots smashing through concrete barriers and into trees @ 100MPH.

This latest incident is actually a testimony of the safety features of the Tesla. Sounds like the object that was hit was a receiver/hitch assembly off a truck (either a light truck like a f-150 or perhaps an 18 wheeler). Something like this, but with the ball/mount actually installed:

or perhaps "just" a 3 ball mount assembly (the description is vague):

The driver says the impact actually made him come off the ground. In many cases, such an impact would likely cause the driver to lose control of the vehicle. But, because the the design of the Tesla (in particular, the extremely low center of gravity, traction control without the issues inherent in having to have differentials, etc.) it seems the driver (according his his testimony) had no problem maintaining control of the vehicle and didn't even realize the severity of the damage.

And then, of course, the car continued to function and was telling him something was wrong and that he needed to get off the road. How the hell cool is that?

Also, as pointed out, in a normal car the passenger compartment is not projected from similar road debris by a 1/4" armor plate. You're lucky if you get sheet metal between you and the road surface inches away.

So the question is, which would you rather have happen in the highly unlikely event you are in a similar accident:

* A punctured battery resulting in a small, easily avoided fire in a car that allows you to maintain control of the vehicle and get to safety.
* No punctured battery, no fire but a catastrophic loss of control and/or function of the vehicle at highway speeds?